Cookie Control

This site uses cookies to store information on your computer.

Some cookies on this site are essential, and the site won't work as expected without them. These cookies are set when you submit a form, login or interact with the site by doing something that goes beyond clicking on simple links.

We also use some non-essential cookies to anonymously track visitors or enhance your experience of the site. If you're not happy with this, we won't set these cookies but some nice features of the site may be unavailable.

By using our site you accept the terms of our Privacy Policy.

(One cookie will be set to store your preference)
(Ticking this sets a cookie to hide this popup if you then hit close. This will not store any personal information)

"Justices Sympathetic To Idaho Landowners in Wetlands Dispute"

"U.S. EPA faced a hostile Supreme Court today as the agency defended its authority to issue compliance orders under the Clean Water Act without allowing an immediate hearing on the underlying issue."



"Justices from both ends of the political spectrum seemed to think that property owners should be able to contest administrative compliance orders that EPA issues when it believes a permit is required before a wetland is filled.

The case, Sackett v. EPA, arose when Mike and Chantell Sackett, from Priest Lake, Idaho, began earth-moving work on a plot of land just yards from scenic Priest Lake in 2007 (Greenwire, Sept. 19, 2011).

EPA then said the property was a wetland, meaning the site was subject to permitting requirements. The landowners were in violation after they placed fill material into wetlands, EPA said.

The compliance order prevented further construction work on the site and required the Sacketts to restore the wetlands."

Lawrence Hurley reports for Greenwire January 9, 2012.

SEE ALSO:

"Supreme Court Critical Of EPA Wetland Order Against Idaho Couple" (Los Angeles Times)

"Supreme Court Justices Criticize EPA's Dealings With Homeowners" (AP)

Source: Greenwire, 01/10/2012